SFR:I've never understood the Global Warming thing. I mean, it exists guys... that's science. Why do people not believe in it? It's not a belief... it's fucking SCIENCE.

I mean, yeah, a large part of it is because of human existence, but if you're not "believing" in it because you don't want to be responsible for something, chill out. One person alone didn't cause rising ocean levels. We all play a role, and pretending Global Warming isn't there WON'T help fix the problem. Is Global Warming and it's effects often hyperbolized? You better believe it. Is it something to ignore? Nope. It's still there, and if we don't do something about it soon, we're going to lose the most important thing on this planet: penguins.

The conspiracy theories also appeal to people because it's nice to think you know the truth everyone else is blind to see, and that you're special, and that goverment is afraid of you for knowing this thing they want to bury.

Iraq wasn't faked, just a criminally ideologically-driven clusterfuck. High-ranking officials have testified that Bush and Cheney 'pushed for war in Iraq to the point of insubordination', despite the only evidence of ties between 9/11 and the Saddam regime being the hearsay of a few shepherds, and the international intelligence community -- including the CIA itself -- telling them that there was little to no evidence that Hussein possessed WMD's.

The truth isn't Haliburton, war-for-oil, etc...it's that we were being led by a criminally retarded wack-job who epitomized that farthest far-right foreign policy agendas of the time, consisting of the exportation of democracy and war.

And as a result of the old-school-right coming to its farthest head in the Bush administration, now we have neo-cons pushing the envelope to even further extremes of batshit whackery!

If I were someone who is operation a conspiracy, I would purposefully inject as many zany, impossible, and far-out conspiracy theories into the collective knowledge pool as possible.

If there is a conspiracy, lets say, the Illuminaty, then I damned well like them because they would have the brains to formulate plans that last years, decades, or even centuries, and are thus by default more capable of organizing humainty that any of the other clusterfucking morons who we actually elect.

Oh, and by the way, want a real conspiracy, close to home, dear bob? Look up J Edgar Hoover. Noone stays in power that long with a clean record.

Bob is a Reptile?!?! What A Tweest!!But seriously I enjoyed this video. It really reminds me of the time that I was obsessed with conspiracy theories. Luckily I realized how ridiculous they were by my second year of high school.

I have been searching around on the topic of global warming, trying to decide wither it is real or not. To me the global warming(GW) argument breaks down into 4 parts. 1) the globe is warming, 2)CO2 is increasing 3) C02 increase(2) causes warming(1) and 4) global warming is very bad.

Generally 1 and 2 are covered at a normal to fast pace, but agreed upon by both sides. part 3 is then more often than not hurriedly rushed over, relying on the incorrect assumption that correlation implies causation. Finally part 4 is overloaded, and crammed in throughout the entire video.

I've tried searching around a bit for some solid evidence on part 3, however the only people who I really see covering it in depth, are the people arguing against GW. With arguments like "the heating is taking place in the wrong area of the atmosphere", and "temperature increases before CO2"(both made by the great global warming swindle)

Now let me clarify, I am not against going green, in fact I think all the advancements towards protecting are planet are excellent.However I don't believe that we have a need to rush this,or scare people into doing it. We need to make the green way, the best way.

I also like to think that I maintain an open mind. Its not that I'm trying to shoot down GW because it gets in the way of industry, or because it makes things harder on me. I don't believe in GW because I believe that there is a a lack of conclusive evidence.Now I know there are going to be some people who want to bring forward every thing under the sun about GW.

So let it be known, I know that the globe is warming. I know that CO2 is increasing, I understand that global warming can be ban, but I don't know that CO2 causes the increase in temperature. So if you want to argue with me, and prove me wrong, the only way that I can see to do it is to prove part 3 of the argument, without correlation implies causation, because it doesn't.

So let it be known, I know that the globe is warming. I know that CO2 is increasing, I understand that global warming can be ban, but I don't know that CO2 causes the increase in temperature. So if you want to argue with me, and prove me wrong, the only way that I can see to do it is to prove part 3 of the argument, without correlation implies causation, because it doesn't.

I have been searching around on the topic of global warming, trying to decide wither it is real or not. To me the global warming(GW) argument breaks down into 4 parts. 1) the globe is warming, 2)CO2 is increasing 3) C02 increase(2) causes warming(1) and 4) global warming is very bad.

Generally 1 and 2 are covered at a normal to fast pace, but agreed upon by both sides. part 3 is then more often than not hurriedly rushed over, relying on the incorrect assumption that correlation implies causation. Finally part 4 is overloaded, and crammed in throughout the entire video.

I've tried searching around a bit for some solid evidence on part 3, however the only people who I really see covering it in depth, are the people arguing against GW. With arguments like "the heating is taking place in the wrong area of the atmosphere", and "temperature increases before CO2"(both made by the great global warming swindle)

Now let me clarify, I am not against going green, in fact I think all the advancements towards protecting are planet are excellent.However I don't believe that we have a need to rush this,or scare people into doing it. We need to make the green way, the best way.

I also like to think that I maintain an open mind. Its not that I'm trying to shoot down GW because it gets in the way of industry, or because it makes things harder on me. I don't believe in GW because I believe that there is a a lack of conclusive evidence.Now I know there are going to be some people who want to bring forward every thing under the sun about GW.

So let it be known, I know that the globe is warming. I know that CO2 is increasing, I understand that global warming can be ban, but I don't know that CO2 causes the increase in temperature. So if you want to argue with me, and prove me wrong, the only way that I can see to do it is to prove part 3 of the argument, without correlation implies causation, because it doesn't.

This.

And remember that hole in the ozone layer? That too. Is it just easier to say "humans did it" than to actually prove otherwise? However, I have to agree with re dir on the idea that going green is good. Why be wasteful and inefficient just because you can.

Then again "selling carbon credits" is a load of shit and I dare anyone to disagree.

I have been searching around on the topic of global warming, trying to decide wither it is real or not. To me the global warming(GW) argument breaks down into 4 parts. 1) the globe is warming, 2)CO2 is increasing 3) C02 increase(2) causes warming(1) and 4) global warming is very bad.

Generally 1 and 2 are covered at a normal to fast pace, but agreed upon by both sides. part 3 is then more often than not hurriedly rushed over, relying on the incorrect assumption that correlation implies causation. Finally part 4 is overloaded, and crammed in throughout the entire video.

I've tried searching around a bit for some solid evidence on part 3, however the only people who I really see covering it in depth, are the people arguing against GW. With arguments like "the heating is taking place in the wrong area of the atmosphere", and "temperature increases before CO2"(both made by the great global warming swindle)

Now let me clarify, I am not against going green, in fact I think all the advancements towards protecting are planet are excellent.However I don't believe that we have a need to rush this,or scare people into doing it. We need to make the green way, the best way.

I also like to think that I maintain an open mind. Its not that I'm trying to shoot down GW because it gets in the way of industry, or because it makes things harder on me. I don't believe in GW because I believe that there is a a lack of conclusive evidence.Now I know there are going to be some people who want to bring forward every thing under the sun about GW.

So let it be known, I know that the globe is warming. I know that CO2 is increasing, I understand that global warming can be ban, but I don't know that CO2 causes the increase in temperature. So if you want to argue with me, and prove me wrong, the only way that I can see to do it is to prove part 3 of the argument, without correlation implies causation, because it doesn't.

This is a great site because it utilizes peer reviewed articles from people who actually know what they are talking about. If you don't believe in global warming, it's simply because of how complex the issue is. The story most people are told is ridiculously simplified, because not everyone is qualified enough to understand the complexities behind global warming. It's hard to do, but you have to concede that maybe people with Ph.Ds (who spend their lives studying these issues) might understand the issue just a tiny bit better than someone like you or me. I mean, hell, I've taken numerous college classes that help me understand some of the science behind it, and even then a lot of the complexity is completely over my head. Doesn't mean it's wrong, just that we can't fully understand it.

We trust doctors to tell us what is wrong with our bodies even though with our limited knowledge they could be flat-out lying to us. Why? Because they are experts in the field of medicine and we concede that they know more than us. Why are scientists treated differently in the public eye?

So let it be known, I know that the globe is warming. I know that CO2 is increasing, I understand that global warming can be ban, but I don't know that CO2 causes the increase in temperature. So if you want to argue with me, and prove me wrong, the only way that I can see to do it is to prove part 3 of the argument, without correlation implies causation, because it doesn't.

I know how the green house gas effect works. However if it were an increase in greenhouse gases that was causing the increased temperature then the temperature increase would start in the Troposphere. However it doesn't start in the Troposphere, it starts at the surface for the most part.

Now this is quite a long video, and I don't expect you to go digging throught it to find bit of data pertaining to my staitments, so may I suggest you watch from 15:40 to 20:00 at the least, there is a bit more on it, but that covers what I talked about herehttp://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5576670191369613647#

Also, I do concede that I am far from an expert on the areas of global warming, and on most of the sciences. However for me to belive in global warming I need to see evidence of the link between them. Thanks for the website, I'll check it out more after dinner(which is happening now)

teknoarcanist:Iraq wasn't faked, just a criminally ideologically-driven clusterfuck. High-ranking officials have testified that Bush and Cheney 'pushed for war in Iraq to the point of insubordination', despite the only evidence of ties between 9/11 and the Saddam regime being the hearsay of a few shepherds, and the international intelligence community -- including the CIA itself -- telling them that there was little to no evidence that Hussein possessed WMD's.

Don't forget the ongoing accusations of massive organized vote fraud in BOTH of Bush's elections. That's a fun one, too.

Urameshi13:I understand being from Massachusetts that you're going to be a left-leaning guy, but the Fox News and Bush bashing is a bit old and trite, don't you think?

Fox-bashing NEVER gets old. Not 'til they stop being the Republican Party's answer to Pravda.

Bush Bashing will get old once all the messes he left are cleaned up. I figure we've got a good twenty-to-fifty years left in them.

I never got too into conspiracy theories, or as we call it in Spain since March 11th, 2004 (our personal 9/11), "conspiranoia" ("conspiracy" + "paranoia").

If anything, I think that from time to time they are actually true, but they are full of it most of the time. And I think that's precisely what can make them scary: since most of the time they aren't true, they can go away with it when they actually are.

Personally, I am very emotionally distanced from them, so when I see a conspiracy theory I can't help but to find it very entertaining. We have to admit that well thought conspiracies have the same appeal as the best written crime novels. I think that's part of why some people find them so attractive.

For instance, I think "JFK" is a GREAT movie. But that's because I don't believe Stone's conspiracy any more that I believe the plot of "Gladiator". Yes, it is based in real events, but the plot core itself is just fiction, even if Stone believed it himself. Although I admit that the single bullet theory should rise an eyebrow... Oh, well, I better don't get into that.

The world is s#!t? Hey Bob, here's a recommendation: grab a backpack and hit the road. Yes, there's a lot of disparity in the world, but it's really not that bad a place if you make the effort to absorb it first hand through the people and their cultures, rather than second hand through our media.

Well, just there you said it was called misaimed sarcasm, so I'll go with that :-P

Generic Gamer:"a big dude in the sky did it" is not the simplest explanation, it requires a massive unexplained phenomenon, a willingness to disregard evidence and a willingness not to observe the world around you.

Not at all. Remember, we're not talking about proving anything here. Remember where I said about avoiding details or problems of proof? Asserting that everything is done by magic (or God, or Superman, or who-fucking-ever) is fundamentally more simple than positing complex solutions for the creation of universe, the rise of sentient life, and so on. It is essentially the simplest answer of all, because it boils down to "just because". It's hard to get any simpler than that, right?

Wrong!

Because that raises tons of unanswered questions. Where did it come from? Where did it get it's power from? etc.

Magic is not simple. Magic is a force that can violate all laws of physics. That's not a simple explanation.

What's more likely: The magician has an elaborate series of trapdoors and mirrors OR the magician has real magical powers he uses to make things cease to exist (which violates the laws of physics).

I don't think Cheney is part of any hooded cabal or anything but he sure does have a lot of coporate contacts that made a lot of money off the Iraqi adventure. You'd have to have a pretty good argument to convince me that him and the old boys club weren't pulling the strings in that administration.

Im a huge libertarian and i sometimes have problems watching these liberal internet shows like Extra credit, current, thatguywiththeglasses, etc and even this show.

Now normally i shrug it off but sometimes they are just too smug about it, thinking their the most intelligent and caring people on the planet.

Example: There were an extra credits recently where he talked about how great he was since he went to an auction that gave the money to charity.

Now Movie bob's claim that man made global warning is not a conspiracy, really annoys me because its such a smug statement, thinking that he knows better then everyone else.

To me alot(not all) of the GW talk sounds more like a religion to me than science, kinda like the new intelligent design.Here is a couple of examples to show what i mean.GW is about the sinful nature of human, and how to better your existance by living a purer simple life. Restraint is the keyword <-> Only have sex to produce offstring never for pleasure, restrain is the keywordGW is about a coming doomsday. <-> Bad people go to hell.GW is caused purely by humen. <-> Relion raises humanity above animals.Gw gets people rallied behind a common cause <-> Religion rallys people behind one belief.GW cant be unproven therefor it is true <-> Religion cant be unproven therefor it is.

Cursed Frogurt:Global warming is real. Whether or not we are significantly affecting it is the debate.

Conspiracy theories are stupid. Personal agendas should always be considered.

really? Its pretty obvious. I think its 97% of scientists believe global warming is caused by humans, the other 3% are less educated and qualified then their brethren.

sry but you are dead wrong. IPCC are hacks and their reports have incomplete data, wrong data, falsified data, make hastily conclusions on vague assumptions and whenever someone speaks against them, they have "classified data" that back them up. Besides IPCC get their support from a lot governments and known spokepersons and a lot of media attention. So everything they say is iniatally blown up, without any evidentbased science backing them up.

if you think 97% of all scientists believe global warming is induced by us people, then you are obviously under the influence of the brainwashing of the IPCC and blabbering incoherently along with the mass. Get your facts straight and contribute in the debate

Nothing is random , a roll of the die isn't random, it's physics in action.But then end result is the same so moot point. As your "opinions" label implies you are aware.

Anyway I liked this, but I think there's a little more to it than the fact it's comforting to think that 9/11 only occurred because it was allowed. People look for pattens, it's what we do, gamers should know this better than most. So when we have events where the cause is simple and stand-alone even if we accept that our brains will try to find any pattens in it, creating them if we don't accept the absence. The hunter who attributes a strange sound to a predator lives longer than the fellow who dismisses it as the wind, rational or no.

You only halfway touched it, it's not that they want to escape from reality it's that they want to feel enlightened, or at least to them it makes alot of sense. It does of course still evade logic but then they pad it down with "cover up!" "lies!". Personally I think we only invaded Iraq just to get rid of Saddam, it was the perfect time to strike and we took it, if it was for WMD's we would've left after we found out there wasn't but instead we stayed to stabilize a new government which likes us.

OK, admittedly I'm new to the threads here, and I enjoy watching these MovieBob vids, but as a conservative I feel like the lone voice of dissent against a thousand strong chorus. Look, I get that Bob's politics lean so far to the left he tips over. It's his soapbox, he's free to say what he wishes. BUT, don't you think that now more than ever we should at least TRY to listen to opposing points of view?

Whenever I hear people call Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck idiots, blowhards, etc., my first question is 'Do you listen/watch their shows?" and 99 times out of 100 I hear "Hell, no! He's an idiot!" I know not every last thing they say is perfect nor gospel, but much of what they say makes sense, if you are only willing to put aside your own prejudices for a little while.

I'm not a Kool-Aid drinker. I believe in pro-choice abortion. I believe in same-sex marriages. I have an ingrained disdain for religions of all stripes as nothing more than ancient superstitions. However, I listen to Rush, watch Fox News, and get really ticked off when I see the shots that certain pundits and so called 'smart people in the room' take at my beliefs. It seems like the only people in this country that are still OK to denigrate and insult in this hyper-sensitive ultra P.C. era are conservatives. Blacks? Well, that's OK if it's Michael Steele. Barack Obama? No way, then you're a racist. Sarah Palin? That's fine. Hillary Clinton? <GASP> Now that kind of rhetoric is just not right!

I guess I just wanted to get this off my chest. As I said, I enjoy watching these vids. I am open to new ideas and thoughts from those who may think differently from me. However, when I see the obvious bias against what I believe in casually thrown in my face, I immediately get turned off what I'm watching, and stop listening.

Maybe if you want to bring people together, you should stop telling half of us we're always wrong.